Model 624 Recall and "F" stamp

[Denver Dick]

Contact Kate Fredette at S&W she knows more about this 624 recall issue than anyone. Try a search here on the forum using her name and all shall be made clear.

Kate and the other S&W folks have no problem providing a call tag for the recall. You should get one. Kate will send you one for sure.

Good luck,

DD

 

[BUFF]

S&W's current .44 Special cylinders are longer than the M-24-3 and M-624 (and earlier models) cylinders. They won't fit without major reworking, being shortened on the front face at least. A gunsmith with a lathe and the correct knowledge could trim a new one down, or modify some other cylinder to fit, or remove the rear portion of the barrel to match up with the new cylinder, but it would be a good bit of labor and be fairly pricey, time being money.

Does anyone know of any Model 624 that had the cylinder fail? I don't believe I have ever heard of one.

You may be ahead of the game to sell it to someone "as is" willing to run the risk, and either finding one in the box with the "C" or buying an early M-629 .44 Magnum Mountain Gun.

 

[VAdoublegunner]

Mine is s/n ALWxxx range so is beyond the recall. However, it does have the "F" on the cylinder.

With all the resources we have on this forum, it would be interesting to see if there is any correlation to the F cylinder mark and the stamped box, especially for those in the recall range. A lot of these are out there without the box.

Also, has anyone on here returned one, found out that it failed, and not gotten it back? Did it have the F stamp?

 

[thedane]

Just got an e-mail from S&W. They don't have any cylinders...

 

[AKtinman]

The article posted by Bis45 stated that the cylinders would be checked by the Magnaflux process.

This process is non-destructive (does not destroy the part being examined) and usually is performed using magnetic particles to reveal an inclusion or crack in the object being tested.

It has been about 35 years since my cursory training on this process, so that’s about all I remember about the process.

Another NDT process is the “dye penetrant” method of revealing minute cracks in metal, but this method would not reveal a void or inclusion in the metal.

Check the yellow pages or do a search on “Non-Destructive Testing” to find someone in your area that may be able to do this for you. Aircraft structural repair facilities often use this process, so that would be another area to check.

Or, you could just shoot and enjoy the gun

 

[thedane]

I found someone at S&W that's going to send me a shipping label.

Should I send it in...


"You've got to ask yourself one question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?"... (Dirty Harry)

 

[Dosgatos]

The 624 Cylinder Mystery

Here's my two cents worth, based on what I've been able to research:

I have a 624 with box, no red "C" on the box. The cylinder has an "F", but I'm told that this has nothing to do with the supposed cylinder issue.

I emailed Roy Jinks about the steel used in the cylinder in February of 2008 and he sent me two replies:

"The cylinder problem was the fact that some cylinders had long charge holes and you could chamber the .44 Magnum round in the cylinder. So it is an easy check. If the gun will chamber the .44 Magnum round then it has one of the cylinders that was affected. if it does not chamber the round then you are okay. You will still be okay as long as you shot only .44 Specials out of the revolver."

I replied to Roy that I had heard that there was a batch of stainless steel which was not to spec. Roy replied:

"Believe what you want to, but it was my project and I certainly do not remember a problem with the stainless steel for the cylinders."

Now think about this: If S&W were to recall revolvers to have their cylinders checked, wouldn't it make more sense to mark the cylinder or revolver rather than stamping a red circled "C" on the box?!? What if the box got lost or was no longer available?!?

 

[Denver Dick]

Does anyone know of any Model 624 that had the cylinder fail? I don't believe I have ever heard of one.

It is my understanding that only one has ever failed the examination. There are a couple of theads about it on the forum, here.


Original poster: If you want to send it in and feel confident when firing it, then send it in. I sent in my 3" LH 624 and it came back with a clean bill of health. Moreover, if I ever sell it, I will feel good about turning it over to another forum member to fire.

I would send it in, but it's your revolver, so you can do what you want. You have enough information now, so make a decision.

Good luck.

 

[BUFF]

It is my understanding that only one has ever failed the examination.

I have red that stated a few times but nobody I recall has said "It happened to me" or anything close to them, just "I heard there was one."

Any link to something more definitive than that?

 

[pred]

Mine was checked by S&W and they should ABSOLUTELY send you a shipping label,, But DO NOT send it to them,
It is a great shooter!
I have a S&W letter along with mine with the serial # on it .

As I remember,, Only 1 or 2 were found defective,,, But I could be wrong.
Shoot it and be happy!
Peter

 

[BUFF]

Ah, dogdoc's failed. Thanks for reposting that, Keith.

 

[thedane]

I received a shipping label from S&W and sent it back today. I decided that, after weighing all the options, I want a certification that it is OK. This is more for the collector value and future owners peace of mind than anything else.

I did a lot of research and made a lot of calls without being able to make any conclusions.

The gun wouldn't chamber a .44 magnum round, so it doesn't seem, per Mr. Jinks, that is the problem.

Before I shipped the gun I noticed an "M" inside a triangle on the bottom side of the grip frame. I'm sure as in the case of the "F" on the back of the cylinder this doesn't mean anything either, like maybe "magnaflux"?

I'll let everyone know the results...

 

[gdeiss]

I notice a discrepancy of sorts in the information provided in message #16 of this thread. The quoted Skelton article provides serial number ranges such as ADXXXXX, etc.; the info from Kate at S & W is nearly the same, ADXXXX, but notice the different number of Xs. The serial number on my 624 is AHTXXXX, which seems to put it in the "uh-oh" category if I interpret the Skelton info correctly, but leaves it out of the recall when using Kate's numbers. Who's right?

 

[thedane]

I think the serial numbers are 7 characters. Mine is AHSXXXX. Kate's info is probably a typo. Nice catch. If you e-mail them they will tell you whether your gun is part of the recall.

I sent my gun in. I called Customer Service and they said it would be a few weeks. There is no way to find out the status of the evaluation. I'll know when I get it back or when they notify me that it failed...

 

[gdeiss]

still confused!

I e-mailed S & W on Monday to ask about my particular revolver, a Lew Horton 624 with a 3" barrel. Based on the serial number Lew Horton said that they had the gun in May of 1985.

Today S & W e-mailed back and suggested I call their customer service number, 800-331-0852, ext. 2905, which I did. The friendly gentleman who answered was aware of the recall but didn't know any particulars about procedures to be taken. He suggested sending it in to see if the cylinder was OK. I asked what would happen if they found that the cylinder was faulty, as I had heard that they would keep the gun if it was. He said he doubted that, that the gun would probably be sent back to me no matter what the results of the test were. At no time did he mention sending me a prepaid label to ship it.

I would think that anyone in S & W customer service would have access to procedures to be followed in this kind of situation. I was more than a little surprised by the wishy-washy non-information that I received. So . . . I'll start the process over again. This time I'll be smarter and ask for Kate as someone here suggested; she has to know more than the gentleman I talked to did!

Greg

 

[Gun 4 Fun]

They will definately keep your gun!

They cannot return a gun that could potentially be a huge liabilty issue for them. Too bad that a lot of the guys who answer the phone in CS weren't around back then, or were little kids at the time, and have no idea what is what, when it comes to anything made before about 2000.

 

[gdeiss]

what's happening with my 624

Kate Fredette at S & W and I have corresponded a couple of times in the last week and it turns out that my 624 was indeed made during the time covered by the recall. She's sending a shipping label to send it in for a check. Her statement: "Most guns have already been sent back, but the gun was never stamped, only the box. There has only been 1 gun sent back so far that had the problem. We had to replace it."

Kate was ambivalent about what would happen if my 624 failed the test, only that we'd "discuss options if necessary". Much as I'd hate to lose it if things turn out bad, I'd rather know that I was pulling the trigger on a safe gun.

Wish me luck; I don't want to be #2!

Greg

 

[thedane]

624 Back From S&W

As I posted earlier, I sent in my Model 624 to be checked out for a faulty cylinder. It was received by S&W on 11/20 and it was returned on Christmas Eve. I have to admit I was excited that I got it back and that there were no problems. A form was included in the box that stated that it had been examined and adjusted to our standards. Basically, "Inspected/Tested & Passed".

I have to say that the process was not easy. After I sent the gun in, I made many calls to customer service and rarely got the same answer. I would highly recommend that S&W improve their tracking system. This should include an extensive data base of all guns returned for recall or repair/modification. IMHO this would be very cost effective and of value to the customer/collector.

However, I'm glad I sent it in and I can confidently shoot it and, some day, pass it on to the next shooter with no worries about its strength.

 

[gdeiss]

After maybe half a dozen exchanges with Kate Fredette I received a prepaid FedEx shipping label (including insurance) from S & W to send my 624 back. I sent it off on January 15 and received it back on February 1 with a note saying it had passed.

In all of this there was only one hiccup. When the revolver got to S & W I got an e-mail from someone in service wondering why I'd sent the 624 in. I had included in the box, per their instructions, contact info and a brief note explaining why I was sending it in. I mentioned Kate as a contact who knew what was up. This note apparently failed to make it to the service department with the 624, but they managed to have my e-mail address . . . weird! At any rate, all was resolved quickly and my 624 is back, safe and sound.

I'm happy I sent mine in. I'd rather know it was safe to shoot than settle for shooting mild stuff for the rest of my life. And, If I ever sell it, I'll feel better being able to tell the new owner that it's officially safe to shoot.

Greg

P.S. I must mention how good Kate was to work with. I briefly corresponded with two other people at S & W about my 624 and got either misinformation or ignorance. Kate was splendid and ALWAYS got things done accurately and efficiently. Kudos to her!

 

[cmj8591]

So lets say you don't send it in and the gun blows, what will you have then? At least if you send it in and it fails they will make it right and you won't end up with a 624 conversation piece. To those guys who think the answer is to just sell it, please let me know what gun shows you set up at so that I can stay away!